Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Blueriq vs IBM BPM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Blueriq
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM BPM
Ranking in Business Process Management (BPM)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (6th), Process Automation (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Business Process Management (BPM) category, the mindshare of Blueriq is 1.1%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM BPM is 4.1%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Management (BPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM BPM4.1%
Blueriq1.1%
Other94.8%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

ChrisBiemans - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Consultant at Ziggo Services B.V.
Stable platform with valuable case management capabilities
We use Everest Blueriq for a food safety organization, that revolves around automating and managing complex processes critical to ensuring food safety and compliance. It involves monitoring containers for pests and diseases before allowing entry into the EU. The platform plays a vital role in…
Ateeq Rehman - PeerSpot reviewer
Unit Head System Implementor at Allied Bank Limited
Automation platforms streamline processes and offer flexibility, but AI integration and version upgrades pose challenges
In the technology world, there is always room for improvement. Technologies evolve day by day, especially with the emergence of artificial intelligence and generative AI models. Although IBM BPM is a substantial product, adopting and integrating new technologies quickly is not easy due to the migration and upgrade paths involved. Every time new versions are released, we face business and production challenges that make rapid adoption challenging. The main concern bothering me today regarding IBM BPM is the integration of AI components.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The biggest benefit of using the product is identifying the issues, enabling a more flexible working method."
"It is a stale solution."
"We use it for automating certain processes which previously took a lot of time for agents to set up different products for customers. They would have to enter a lot of different systems. This has now mostly been automated."
"It continues to keep up with the changing needs of the business. That is the strong value proposition of BPM. It's not a one-time automation."
"It has improved my organization quite a bit. It brought awareness to what the business processes are, even to the business side, who did not necessarily know what they are."
"There are a lot of things that you get out-of-the-box: Timers and so on, which took a lot of effort and code before."
"The most valuable feature for the organization is the Document Store."
"Some of the features that I like the most are team management and process performance. They are both very useful and very powerful with regard to the workflow."
"IBM's deployment box is one huge black box. We can create all the services with our own code or without a codebase, however, we have a huge amount of space with practically no limitation."
 

Cons

"The platform's initial setup process could be better."
"There is a lot of room for improvement of the dashboards."
"When you have to integrate files for enterprise applications."
"We would like better performance and more ​visibility on each step of the tool.​"
"We have had to use Mule as an alternative integration tool because it is more flexible than IBM BPM."
"Stability wavers. We have some opportunities for improvement in this space, especially as we approach our target volume of a million transactions a day. It is tough, because it is not necessarily the product. It is more around the platform and infrastructure to support it, so the connectivity to the database, web sessions, and reverse proxies in front of that."
"I suggest establishing a developer forum for better communication and issue resolution. Also, the administration panel could be improved for task management."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is expensive since it is an enterprise application."
"The price is good but could be a little lower."
"It's expensive. All software is always extremely high. The manufacturing cost that we have compared to the selling cost, it's not like you're building a house or building a car. But putting that aside, considering that it's expensive, it's a lot of money. If you compare it with some of the other alternatives in the market, it's a similar price. For instance, if you compare it with Pegasystems, it's a similar price."
"The price of the solution is fair for an enterprise solution that has both cloud and on-premise deployments and when comparing to competitors. Recently IBM has introduced Cloud Pak which allows for more flexible licensing options for automation and other features."
"It may be cheaper for organizations to pay for the Viewer licenses that are immediately up and running in the cloud, rather than paying for someone to administer publishing to an intranet."
"It gives us a good return on investment."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing a ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management (BPM) solutions are best for your needs.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise72
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Everest Blueriq?
The biggest benefit of using the product is identifying the issues, enabling a more flexible working method.
What needs improvement with Everest Blueriq?
The platform's initial setup process could be better.
What is your primary use case for Everest Blueriq?
We use Everest Blueriq for a food safety organization, that revolves around automating and managing complex processes critical to ensuring food safety and compliance. It involves monitoring contain...
Which is better, IBM BPM or IBM Business Automation Workflow?
We researched both IBM solutions and in the end, we chose Business Automation Workflow. IBM BPM has a good user interface and the BPM coach is a helpful tool. The API is very useful in providing en...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM BPM?
Once it is installed, maintaining it is not a big issue.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Blueriq, Aquima
WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Abn Amro, Aegon, duo, City of Tilburg
Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito Santo
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Automation Anywhere, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM). Updated: February 2026.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.